Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0718110-022047 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0718110-022047
論文名稱
Title
分析企業面臨金融海嘯時所實行的因應策略之研究
The analysis of strategies that enterprises take in the financial crisis
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
55
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2010-06-08
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2010-07-18
關鍵字
Keywords
金融危機、企業因應策略、體制理論、模仿力、規範力、強制力、生態理論
Financial tsunami, Responsive strategies, Institutional theory, Population theory, Mimetic force, Normative force, Coercive force
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5813 次,被下載 0
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5813 times, has been downloaded 0 times.
中文摘要
台灣企業在西元2008-2009年間,面臨了劇烈的金融危機,造成失業率提升、國家經濟的蕭條。面對外在的衝擊,各家企業紛紛做出多樣策略選擇來因應這波金融海嘯所造成的危機。而本研究旨在瞭解在這兩年間,金融海嘯對台灣上市櫃企業所造成的影響,並根據體制理論三個面向及生態理論的觀點來分析企業選擇策略的背後成因為何。企業選擇因應策略的兩個面向為:市場壓力大小及體制壓力大小,而體制壓力來源又可分為:模仿性壓力、規範性壓力及強制性壓力。
本研究主要的目的是分析市場壓力大小及眾多體制壓力大小是如何影響企業的策略選擇。透過對220家企業進行問卷調查分析,我們發現在市場及模仿性及強制性壓力皆大時,企業會傾向選擇「操弄」的策略;市場及模仿性及強制性壓力皆小時,企業會傾向選擇「妥協」的策略;而在市場壓力大但模仿性及強制性壓力小時,企業會傾向選擇「反抗」的策略;而在市場壓力小但模仿性及強制性壓力大時,企業會傾向選擇「默許」的策略。
Abstract
During Nov.2008 to Apr. 2009, firms in Taiwan encountered dramatic financial crisis, and this impact made unemployment rate still climbing and economic depression. In order to reduce the impact from financial tsunami, every firm takes some strategies to resist it. The objective of our study is to find out the influence from financial tsunami on the listed companies. More importantly, we base on the three mechanisms (mimetic force, normative force and coercive force) of institutional theory and the perspectives of population theory to analyze why firms choose those strategies.
We collect and analyze 201 returned questionnaires. We find when firms face both high market force, mimetic force and coercive, they tend to choose manipulation strategies. When firms face both low market force, mimetic force and coercive force, they tend to choose compromise strategies. When firms face high market force and low mimetic force and coercive force, they tend to use defiance strategies. When firms face low market force and high mimetic force and coercive force, they tend to use acquiescence strategies.
目次 Table of Contents
Contents

Mandarin Abstract i
English Abstract ii
Acknowledgements iii
Contents iv
List of figures v
List of tables vi
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
Chapter 2 Theoretical background 4
2.1 The Role of Strategy 4
2.2 Institutional Theory 5
2.3 Discussion of Institutional Theory 8
2.4 Population Ecology 9
Chapter 3 Research framework and methodolog 11
3.1 Strategic Response Architecture 11
3.2 Hypothesis 19
3.3 Method 24
3.3.1 Data Collection 24
3.3.2 Variables 25
Chapter 4 Results 29
4.1 Findings 29
4.2 Discussion 40
Chapter 5 Conclusions 41
5.1 Contributions 41
5.2 Future Directions 41
5.3 Limitations 42
Bibliography 43
參考文獻 References
1. Alfred D. Chandler,1962. Strategy and Structure.
2. Anderson R.C. &Reeb D.M.,2003. Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of finance. 58:1301-1327
3. Bantel K.A. & Jackson S.E.,1989. Top management and innovations in banking: does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal. 10: 107-124.
4. Barry M. Staw & Lisa D. Epstein, 2000.What bandwagons bring: Effects of popular management techniques on corporate performance, reputation, and CEO pay.Administrative science Quarterly,45: 523-556.
5. Begley T.M. & Tan W.L.,2001.The socio-cultural environment for entrepreneurship: A comparison between East Asian and Anglo-Saxon countries. Journal of International Business Studies. 32: 537-553.
6. Bernard V.L.&Thoma J., 1990. Evidence that stock prices do not fully reflect the implications of current earnings for future earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics. 13:305-340.
7. Campbell J.L.,Hollingsworth J.R., Lindberg L.N., 1991. Economic governance and the analysis of structural change in the American economy. Governance of the American economy.
8. ChoteP.Linger J.K.,1986. Business and the short term syndrome. Washington Post. June 15: F1-F2.
9. Coffee, John C. Jr.,1991.Liquidity versus control: the institutional investor as corporate monitor.Columbai Law Review. 91: 1277-1368.


10. Dacin M.T.,Goodstein J, Scott W.R. ,2002. Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of management journal. 45: 43-56.
11. Davis P.,1983. Realizing the potential of the family business. Organizational Dynamics. 12:47-56.
12. DiMaggio,P.J.,& Powell,W.W.1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields.American sociological review. 48: 147-160.
13. Dollinger M.J., Golden P.A. and Saxton T., 1997. The effect of reputation on the decision to joint venture. Strategic Management Journal.18: 127-140.
14. DowlingJ.& Pfeffer J.,1975. Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review. 18:122-135.
15. Drucker P.F.,1986.To end the raiding roulette game. Across the board. 23: 30-39.
16. Etherington,L., & A.J.Richardson, 1994. Institutional Pressures on University Accouting Education in Canada. Comtemporary Accounting Research, 141-161.
17. Francis J. Aguilar, Robert A. Howell, Richard F. Vancil, Lewis B, 1970. Formal planning systems .
18. Goodstein J.D.,1994. Institutional pressures and strategic responsiveness: Employer involvement in work-family issues. Academy of management review. 37:350-382.
19. Grewal R. &Tansuhaj P.,2001. Building Organizational Capabilities for Managing Economic Crisis: The Role of Market Orientation and Strategic Flexibility. Journal of Marketing. 65: 67-80

20. Haigh M. &Jones M.T.,2006. The drivers of corporate social responsibility: a critical review. Ashridge Business School.
21. Hambrick D.C. & Mason P.A.,1984.Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of management review. 9: 193-206.
22. Hodge G.A. and Carsten G.,2007. Public–Private Partnerships: An international performance review. Public Administration Review: 67: 545-588.
23. Holderness C.G.&Sheehan D.P.,1988. The role of majority shareholders in publicly held corporations:: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Financial Economics. 20: 317-346.
24. Jacob M.T.,1991. Short-term America: The causes and cures of our business myopia. Harvard Business School Press.
25. Jyh-Jer Roger Ko, 2008. Organizations' strategic responses to the new pension system: an analysis integrating resource dependence theory and new institutionalism. Taiwanese Sociology. 16: 49-95.
26. Kotler P, 1986.Principles of Marketing,3rd edition, Prentice-Hall.
27. Kumar K.B.&Rajan R.G.&Zingales L.,2001. What determines firm size? CRSP Working Paper No. 496.
28. Lawrence R. Jauch,William F. Glueck,1988. Business policy and strategic management.
29. Lipnack J.& Stamps J. 1993, "One plus one equals three", Small Business Reports. 18: 49 - 58.
30. Mark C. Suchman, 1995.Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of management review, 20:571-610.
31. Mark Granovetter,1995. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91:481-510.
32. Mascarenhas B.&Aaker D.A.,1989. Mobility Barriers and Strategic Groups. Strategic Management Journal. 10:475-485.
33. Mason A. Carpenter, 2002. The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance.Strategic Management Journal. 23: 275-284.
34. Meyer, MW. 1979. Organizational structure as signaling. Pacific Sociological Review. 22: 481-500.
35. Meyer,J.W., & Rowan,B. 1983. Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality:71-97. Beverly Hills,CA: Sage.
36. Meyer,J.W., & Rowan,B., 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology. 83: 340-363.
37. Michael E.Porter,1996. What is strategy? Harvard business review. 6: 62-78
38. Milliken F.J., 1987.Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: State, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of management review. 12:133-143.
39. Oliver C, 1991.Strategy Responses to Institutional Process.Academy of management review, 16: 145-179.
40. Paul J. DiMaggio&Walter.W Powell,1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review.48:147-160.
41. Pfeffer,J. & Salancik,G.R. 1978. The external control of organizations. New York: Harper& Row.
42. Powell, W.W.,1991.Expanding the scope of institutional analysis. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis .183-204.

43. Quinn& Brian J.,1978.Strategic Change: "Logical Incrementalism." Sloan Management Review. 20: 7-19.
44. Richardson, A.J., and J.Joshi, 1993.Legitimacy and efficiency: Conceptual Models and Empirical Methods. Paper presented at American Sociological Association Conference, Miami.
45. Robert B. Duncan,1972. Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative science quarterly:313-327.
46. Scott,W.R. 1987.The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative science quarterly: 32: 493-511.
47. Scott,W.R. 1998. Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems.
48. Simon H.A., 1960. The new science of management decision. New York Harper& Row.
49. Teitelman R.,1993. Wall Street and the new economic correctness. Institutional Investor. 27: 37-42.
50. Thompson, James,1967. Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
51. Thronton, D.B., 1979. Information and institutions in the capital market. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 4: 211-233.
52. Von Neumann J& Morgenstern O.,1947. Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press
53. Weber M, 1952. The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Scribner
54. Wiersema M.F. & Bantel K.A., 1992. Top management team demography and corporate strategic change. Academy of Management Journal. 35: 91-121.


55. Williams K.Y., & O’Reilly C.A., 1998. Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior. 20: 77-140.

56. Month report in December 2008, Council of Labor Affairs.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外均不公開 not available
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus:永不公開 not available
校外 Off-campus:永不公開 not available

您的 IP(校外) 位址是 3.236.142.143
論文開放下載的時間是 校外不公開

Your IP address is 3.236.142.143
This thesis will be available to you on Indicate off-campus access is not available.

紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code